After BCI decided to withhold AIBE 2019 results from specific centres, an advocate challenged its decision. The petition was filed in the Andhra Pradesh High Court. BCI countered the plea stating enough grounds (i.e. Malpractice) to withhold exams.
Earlier, BCI announced its decision to withhold AIBE results from individual centres. It published a list of these centres. Further, it asked such candidates to reappear for the exam which gave AIBE 2019 from these centres.
Petitioner’s Arguments
Following the issuance of this notification Advocate, Bilaal Ahmed Syed challenged it. Advocate M Soloman Raju represented the petitioner. He argued that BCI’s decision is illegal and violative of Article 14 of the Indian Constitution. He claimed that the impugned decision lacks application of mind. Advocate Syed also appeared for AIBE 2019 in a centre at Visakhapatnam. His centre falls in the list of 9 centres whose results had been blocked.
Syed argued that it does not seem fair to ask all candidates of one centre to retake exams if there is a mismatch in codes. He informed the Court that all candidates from those nine centres were asked to retake exams. That is irrespective of the fact that there was no mismatch in all students’ exam codes. He countered BCI’s allegation of Malpractice at these centres. He stated that Malpractice could not take place since AIBE is an open book exam.
Respondent’s Arguments
BCI opposed the plea stating enough grounds. It stated that due to errors found and mismatch in exam codes, exams from some centres were affected. Thus results were blocked. Therefore, it asked candidates to retake the exam. It added that candidates do not have to pay fees for reappearing for the exam.
BCI had filed its reply in May this year. It stated that BCI conducts AIBE through an agency. A High-Powered Committee monitors the exam procedure. The Committee has its head a retired Supreme Court Judge. The agency which conducts exam raised specific issues related to the listed centres. Thus, the Monitoring Committee decided to withhold results from these centres. BCI added that conducting agency had recommended the Committee to seek help from cyber expert to determine if cheating and Malpractice occurred. Monitoring Committee had decided that Malpractice had occurred in these centres after it took note of a report on the aspect of cheating. Thereby, BCI requests the Court to dismiss the petition.
Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgements from the court. Follow us on Google News, Instagram, LinkedIn, Facebook & Twitter. You can also subscribe for our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.
